Seán Ó Fearghaíl
Question:6. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Defence if he will provide a progress report on Ireland’s participation in the Austro-German Battlegroup; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54759/12]
Other Questions
EU Battlegroups
Mick Wallace
Question:29. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Defence the cost of training troops to participate in the Austro-German Battlegroup; if money was allocated to cover the potential deployment of these troops and the number of days this money covered; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54757/12]
Clare Daly
Question:33. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Defence the cost of Ireland's participation in the German led EU battlegroup. [54756/12]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6, 29 and 33 together.
Ireland is participating in the Austro-German-led battle group which will be on standby until 31 December. In 2010 the then Government approved Ireland's participation in this battle group. The other members of the Austro-German battle group are Austria, Germany, the Czech Republic, Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. A battle group is a standard technical military term and consists of about 1,500 personnel. The purpose of a battle group is to undertake operations commonly referred to as the Petersberg Tasks which are set out in the Amsterdam treaty. The tasks include rescue tasks, peacemaking, peacekeeping and humanitarian tasks. Ireland participates in order to enhance its military capability and inter-operability with other member states' defence forces.
Our contribution is a reconnaissance company. Should the battle group be deployed, Ireland's contribution would amount to approximately 175 personnel. During the stand-by period, one officer has been deployed to the battle group headquarters in Ulm, Germany for training and planning activities. The costs of equipment and additional training for participation in the battle group are marginal. The capabilities and equipment in respect of Ireland's contributions to the battle groups already reside within the Defence Forces. Training of Irish troops for the Austro-German battle group took place in Ireland and no joint field exercises or manoeuvre training took place. There were no specific additional costs arising in association with the preparation and stand-by period.
Should the battle group be deployed, the current estimated additional maximum cost for 120 day deployment is €10.7 million, excluding allowances and ammunition, which are generally already provided for in the Defence Vote. There are no proposals under consideration at this time for the deployment of the Austro-German battle group. On the basis that it will cease to function on 31 December, it is not anticipated that there will be.
I am conscious that participation in the Nordic battle group and, consequently, the Austro-German battle group was approved by the previous Government. I am interested in knowing about the deliberations the Minister has had with the Chief of Staff and his partners in the Government on future participation. Has he, in consultation with interested parties, had the opportunity to evaluate the success, or otherwise, of participation in the two battle groups? Does he have proposals to bring to the House in the near future on Ireland's continued participation?
I am happy to tell the Deputy that preliminary discussions have been held on Ireland's possible participation in 2015 in the Nordic battle group, to which he referred. Ireland participated in the Nordic battle group in 2008 and 2011. Other members of the Nordic battle group were Sweden which was acting as the framework nation, Finland, Norway, Estonia and Croatia. Ireland is due to participate again in the Austro-German battle group in 2016. This is also under positive consideration.
We view our participation as being beneficial to the Defence Forces with regard to training and interoperability issues but also as signifying in a European Union context that we are willing to come together with other member states to deal with peacekeeping, peace enforcement and rescue missions. It is important we are seen to make a contribution in this area and that is the Government's perspective on this.
The Deputy might be interested to know that at European level a dialogue has commenced to examine the utility of the battle group concept. Rather than an entire battle group being deployed on a peacekeeping mission on some occasion under a United Nations mandate should some issue arise, Europe could beneficially participate by deploying a portion of a battle group with particular skills. That might be worth considering for the future, as opposed to battle groups being in place, which fortuitously to date have not been called upon, and they having a certain level of training but not being utilised in a manner that could be beneficial in peacekeeping or peace enforcement missions.
Will that be a priority issue for the Minister as he chairs the Council of Ministers for Defence in the next six month period? In that regard, are there any other gems of wisdom he might give us in terms of his priorities in his role during the next six months?
We have a number of priorities dealing with the European Council meetings that will take place. As the Deputy may already know, an informal Council meeting will take place in Dublin, based at Dublin Castle, on 12 and 13 February at which a variety of issues will be under discussion. One of the issues of importance as we go through our Presidency is preparation for the European Council meeting of Heads of State in December 2013 when they address issues of European security and defence. An issue of particular relevance and importance is the manner in which UN missions are currently deployed and mandated. The role of the European Union as a regional entity in providing what I would describe as a European Union based deployed mission under a UN mandate is something that is very important.
As the Deputy will know, 21 member states of the Union are members of NATO and the other members states are not members of it. Some of the deployments have had a NATO dimension as opposed to a European Union dimension. We specifically invited, as I thought it would be of importance and interest, someone at high level in the UN to address the informal meeting on the greater connectivity between the UN and the EU as an entity in peacekeeping and peace enforcement missions. That is an area with which we will be dealing at the informal Defence Council meeting. There is a broad range of other issues to which some level of priority needs to be given such as pooling and sharing between the different member states where we may have joint missions with member states under a UN mandate.
If the Deputy puts down a question, I would be happy to go through all the various issues we anticipate will come up. The very important issue is the operations in which we are engaged in conjunction with EU colleagues. For example, EUTM Somalia, which is headed up by a member of our Defence Forces, provides training for new members of the Somalian defence forces. That training is currently taking place in Uganda but it is envisaged the mission will go to Mogadishu shortly. That is one of a number of issues that will be discussed during the course of our Presidency.
White Paper on Defence
Denis Naughten
Question:7. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Defence when the White Paper on the Defence Forces will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54646/12]
The White Paper published in 2000 has provided, as the Deputy is aware, the framework within which the defence organisation has responded to the significant changes in the defence and security environment. I am of the view that the preparation for the new White Paper on defence will benefit greatly from an informed and wide-ranging debate on Ireland’s defence policy. To that end and having considered the preliminary work undertaken on the new White Paper, I decided to initiate the preparation of a Green Paper on defence. The purpose of the Green Paper will be to elicit and stimulate the policy debate and discussion.
I expect a draft Green Paper will be submitted to me for consideration shortly. I will subsequently bring a memorandum to Government, early in 2013, seeking formal approval to publish the Green Paper and to initiate the consultation process to inform the White Paper. The new White Paper on defence is scheduled for completion at the end of 2013.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Some 12 or 13 years will have elapsed from the publication of the last White Paper on Defence to the publication of the new White Paper and yet in the past 12 months significant changes have taken place in the Defence Forces. There has been a move from a three-group to a two-group brigade structure, the abolition of the command at Custume Barracks in Athlone and a restructuring of the Reserve Defence Forces. In tandem with those changes a significantly increased threat has been posed by dissident republicans on both sides of the Border and they have been engaged in far greater activity. In that context, does the Minister believe we need to reconsider the restructuring of the Defence Forces and the objectives and goals for our security forces?
I would not give respectability to the groups the Deputy mentioned by referring to them as dissident republicans: they are primarily criminal terrorists who have no respect of any description for the democratic will of people on both sides of this island to bring an end to violence, mayhem and destruction. They are individuals who, while waving a green flag, are deeply involved in criminality in the area of drugs, fuel laundering and extortion and are hell bent on causing death and mayhem if possible. In that context, I want to pay tribute to both the Garda Síochána and the Defence Forces for the work they do in providing a safe community on this side of the island and to the Garda Síochána and the PSNI for the full co-operation that exists between both bodies in seeking to prevent incidents and also in investigating events that occurred such as the most recent tragic death of a prison officer in Northern Ireland.
The reorganisation of the Defence Forces was designed to ensure that we have the practical necessary numbers in the Defence Forces to deal with issues that arise such as issues of subversion in so far as the Defence Forces are engaged in that area and also to facilitate their engagement in their international duties. The reorganisation was also designed to ensure that we use resources wisely. Both the Defence Forces and the Garda Síochána have the capability to continue to co-operate fully and work with each other to ensure that what is necessary is done to counteract the threat of the criminal terrorists who remain on this island.
Deputy Eoghan Murphy has signalled he wishes to ask a question and following him I will call Deputy Naughten.
In the preparation of the White Paper will the Minister consult other governments to share analysis or to learn of their thinking in terms of the preparation of white papers? Currently, the French Government is drafting a new White Paper. I had the opportunity to visit French Ministry for Defence recently and some of the thinking and work they are putting into the process is very interesting and we could learn from that. Also, it is important to know what our partners in Europe are thinking in terms of European co-operation in security and defence. Will that be an element in the White Paper when it is produced?
I thank the Deputy for his question. There will be widespread consultation following the publication of the Green Paper. I am very conscious that when the last White Paper was published it had very important content and it has stood the test of time, in fairness to those who published it, but it appeared a little like a rabbit out of a hat without the level of consultation that I believe should take place, which is why I decided to publish a Green Paper. It will pose a variety of questions and address a number of issues with a view to stimulating domestic debate and also place Ireland in the context in which we now find ourselves within the European Union where there has been substantial treaty changes. There is a very different environment with regard to European security and defence issues. We live in a different environment with regard to the level of international terrorism with which we are now confronted. Sometimes people forget that our White Paper was published prior to the 11 September atrocities, the London bombings and the treats posed by Muslim fundamentalists in various parts of Europe.
I am looking forward to engaging with my European colleagues on these issues, as well as being informed by them on issues of relevance to the formulation of our own White Paper. Obviously, we must ultimately make our own decisions about these matters. I am looking forward to Members participating in this process, as well as arranging several opportunities for people to express their views on the Green Paper including a conference in which it will be debated and discussed.
May I remind both Ministers and Deputies that there is one minute for both a supplementary question and reply in fairness to all Members? Deputy Naughten now has 30 seconds left for his supplementary.
I echo what the Minister said regarding the handle I gave the individuals in question earlier. They are criminal terrorists. In light of the fact we have a different security environment on this island, and in the European Union as a whole, along with the increased terrorist activity and the increased trafficking of women and children across the Border, is the Minister just closing the stable door after the horse has bolted? The restructuring of the Defence Forces is already taking place in advance of the Green and White Papers.
Unfortunately, time has elapsed and we must move on to the next question.
European Council Meetings
John McGuinness
Question:8. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Defence if he will report on the recent meeting of the EU Foreign Affairs Council with Ministers of Defence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54769/12]
Seamus Kirk
Question:16. Deputy Seamus Kirk asked the Minister for Defence the agenda for the recent meeting of the EU Foreign Affairs Council with Ministers of Defence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54792/12]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 16 together.
I attended both the formal Foreign Affairs Council in defence Minister format and the meeting of the European Defence Agency steering board which preceded it on 19 November. The agenda for the steering board consisted of the 2013 budget and work programme, the work plan for 2013 to 2015 and a voluntary code of conduct on defence pooling and sharing. The work programme for 2013 was agreed by the steering board. However, as the budget for 2013 could not be agreed, it was referred for decision to the follow-on Foreign Affairs Council meeting. The European Defence Agency steering board adopted the code of conduct on pooling and sharing which comprises a series of concrete actions to mainstream pooling and sharing in national decision-making processes and to be implemented on a national and voluntary basis.
The steering board meeting was followed by the formal meeting of defence ministers. The first issue was the European Defence Agency budget for 2013. As unanimity could not be achieved, it was decided to accept a flat cash budget for 2013. This means that Ireland's contribution to the agency's budget of €30.5million for 2013 is approximately €284,000, the same as last year.
The next point to be discussed was the military operations conducted by the European Union under the Common Security and Defence Policy. There are three such operations at the moment: Operation Atalanta, a naval counter-piracy mission off the Horn of Africa; the EU Training Mission Somalia, an operation to train the Somali defence forces; and Operation Althea, the military mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The meeting warmly welcomed the successes in the Somali region. Piracy attacks are down to the lowest level in several years. To date, 3,000 members of the Somali defence forces have been trained and deployed to secure both the capital and other major towns in Somalia. This training mission is led by Colonel Michael Beary of our Defence Forces.
The meeting was then addressed by the Commissioner for Internal Market and Services, Michel Barnier, who outlined the urgent need to optimise our efforts in reinforcing the defence industrial base, which is a significant industry sector and provider of jobs in Europe. A communication from the Commission on defence, incorporating the work of the Commission defence task force, is due to issue in May 2013. There followed a joint lunch of foreign and defence ministers at which two items were discussed, the situation in Mali and the European Council on Defence in late 2013.
It was noted Mali is a multidimensional crisis and the preparations for an EU operation were well advanced. The planned mission is similar to the training mission being conducted in Somalia and will not be a military mission per se.
The final item discussed was preparations for the European Council debate on defence issues in late 2013. The importance of this planned debate was noted as was the occasion to engage EU Heads of Government on defence issues. All agreed that the opportunity should not be missed and that it was highly desirable to be practical as well as getting clear political orientations from the Council on critical choices facing Ministers in the context of defence generally and Common Security and Defence Policy.
I also had several bilateral meetings around the meeting including with the chief executive of the European Defence Agency, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Baroness Catherine Ashton, the Secretary General of NATO and the UK and Polish Ministers attending the Foreign Affairs Council, at which I briefed them on our informal meetings taking place in February in Dublin.
As these two questions are being taken together, there will be a little more time for supplementary questions.
Does this mean we have double time?
It means double the time and double the excitement.
I thank the Minister for his response. He has said before that the participation of the Defence Forces in EU battle groups increases their interoperability with forces from other EU member states. Does this whole area of interoperability form part of the discussions the Minister has had with his EU counterparts and those one would expect to have in the course of the year ahead?
Members of the Minister's party, when in opposition, had interesting views on Ireland's role in the Common Security and Defence Policy. Does the Minister believe the best way to secure the safety of our people at home and abroad, as well as fulfilling our responsibilities to our EU neighbours and friends, would be for Ireland to play an active role in common defence and security measures? Should we be designing security and defence architecture that suits our particular needs? Has the Minister any gems of wisdom to cast our way on this matter?
I appreciate the Deputy's continuing interest in my having possible gems of wisdom. All members of the Fine Gael Party always have interesting things to say on a broad range of issues.
Interoperability is like pooling and sharing, a relevant issue in the context of member states dealing with common security or defence issues or, as I said earlier, dealing with co-operation in EU-UN missions. It is important when engaging with partners in such missions that we complement each other and that people can properly communicate. Pooling and sharing also means member states can save resources in cases where there is a need for common resources for a particular mission by removing the unnecessary duplication of expenditure.
Many of the issues that come up at these meetings are security issues. How do we in Europe best deal with issues of international terrorism and cybersecurity? What threats does cybercrime pose to essential utilities in member states or important businesses on which the economic base of the country may be dependent? Cybersecurity is a cross-cutting issue because it can fall within both defence and policing issues.
Being in the unusual position of having both the defence and the justice briefs, I can see the need at a European level for greater connectivity in this area. It is an issue I have discussed with my colleagues. At Justice Council meetings one has justice ministers talking about cybercrime and cybersecurity while another group of ministers on the defence side is talking about the very same issues. There is a need for connectivity in how we approach these issues.
There are many interesting and important issues in the defence area that we are going to prioritise during the Irish EU Presidency. It will provide a forum for the exchange of ideas along with the opportunity to discuss current EU-related defence issues and their impact internationally, all of which inform ongoing developments in the area of Common Security and Defence Policy. A positive and active agenda under the Common Security and Defence Policy is planned for our Presidency which will demonstrate Ireland's full support for the EU role in crisis management, international peace and security and our positive re-engagement with the European Union generally.
Overseas Missions
Michael McGrath
Question:9. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Defence the new United Nations missions he expects the Defence Forces to undertake in 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54765/12]
Bernard Durkan
Question:15. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the extent to which further deployment of Irish troops at various locations overseas is anticipated or has been requested; when he expects current deployments to end and or new assignments to commence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54796/12]
Robert Troy
Question:32. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Defence if the Defence Forces will participate in any new United Nations missions over the next year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54790/12]
Bernard Durkan
Question:176. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the total number of members of the Defence Forces that have served overseas over the years; the extent to which such service is planned for the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55034/12]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 15, 32 and 176 together. I am frightened to ask how much time that gives us as a consequence.
The Minister's initial reply should be six minutes.
I will try to be briefer than that.
Through the United Nations stand-by arrangements system Ireland has offered to provide up to 850 military personnel for overseas service at any one time, which demonstrates our commitment to the cause of international peace. This continues to be the maximum sustainable commitment that Ireland can make to overseas peacekeeping operations. Ireland is currently contributing 438 Defence Forces personnel to 11 different missions throughout the world. Full details of all personnel currently serving overseas are listed in the tabular statement provided.
Ireland's main deployment is in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, with 361 personnel, with smaller contributions in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Afghanistan and the European Union training mission, EUTM, in Somalia. Ireland is also currently participating in the Austro-German-led battlegroup, which is on stand-by until 31 December 2012.
The question referred to the future deployment of the Defence Forces overseas. Ireland receives requests from time to time relating to participation in various missions and these are considered on a case-by-case basis. When considering any particular request, the existence of realistic objectives and a clear mandate which has the potential to contribute to a political solution, consideration of how the mission relates to the priorities of Irish foreign policy and the degree of risk involved are among the factors considered. Ireland received an invitation from the operational commander of Operation Atalanta of the European Union Naval Force Somalia, EU NAVFOR, to contribute an autonomous vessel protection detachment, AVPD, to the operation. Currently, EU NAVFOR has received offers from five member states to provide such a detachment. As a result, the requirement for additional AVPDs does not arise in the immediate future and no vacancies will exist within the mission for such detachments until August 2013. Consideration may be given closer to the time with regard to whether Ireland will contribute after August 2013. We have also received an invitation from the UN requesting the deployment of a specialist training team on conventional munitions disposal, CMD, and mine and specialist search awareness to support the work of the United Nations mine action service in South Sudan. The request is currently under consideration. The Department of Defence constantly reviews the deployment of Defence Forces personnel overseas. At this time, it is not anticipated that there will be any major additional deployment of troops to further missions in 2013.
Members of the Permanent Defence Force Serving Overseas as at 1st December 2012
|
1 |
UN missions |
|
|
(i) |
UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) HQ UNIFIL 107 th Infantry Battalion UNIFIL Sector West HQ |
16 337 8 |
|
(ii) |
UNTSO (United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation) – Israel, Syria and Lebanon |
11 |
|
(iii) |
MINURSO (United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara) |
3 |
|
(iv) |
MONUSCO (United Nations Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) |
3 |
|
(v) |
UNOCI (United Nations Mission in Ivory Coast) |
2 |
|
TOTAL |
380 |
|
|
UN-mandated missions |
||
|
(vi) |
EUFOR (EU-led Operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina) |
7 |
|
(vii) |
EUTM Somalia (EU-led Training Mission in Uganda) |
10 |
|
(viii) |
KFOR (International Security Presence in Kosovo) – HQ |
12 |
|
(ix) |
ISAF (International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan) |
7 |
|
TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL SERVING WITH UN MISSIONS |
416 |
|
|
2 |
Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) |
|
|
(i) |
OSCE Mission to Bosnia & Herzegovina |
2 |
|
(ii) |
OSCE Mission in Belgrade - Serbia |
1 |
|
(iii) |
Head of High Level Planning Group, Vienna |
1 |
|
(iv) |
Staff Officer, High Level Planning Group, Vienna |
1 |
|
TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL SERVING WITH OSCE |
5 |
|
|
3 |
EU Military Staff |
|
|
Brussels |
4 |
|
|
4 |
Austro-German Battlegroup |
|
|
Ulm, Germany |
1 |
|
|
5 |
Military Representatives/Advisers/Staff |
|
|
(i) |
Military Adviser, Permanent Mission to UN, New York |
1 |
|
(ii) |
Military Adviser, Irish Delegation to OSCE, Vienna |
1 |
|
(iii) |
Staff Appointments, Irish Delegation to OSCE, Vienna |
2 |
|
(iv) |
Military Representative to EU (Brussels) |
5 |
|
(v) |
Liaison Office of Ireland, NATO/PfP (Brussels) |
2 |
|
(vi) |
EU OHQ Operation Althea, Mons, Belgium |
1 |
|
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEFENCE FORCES PERSONNEL SERVING OVERSEAS |
438 |
I thank the Minister for his response on this matter. We should never fail to avail of the opportunity at such times to acknowledge the value of the service that our Defence Forces have provided in a variety of countries overseas. Time and again they have distinguished themselves in the service they have given in the cause of peace. Some of them have sacrificed their lives. In general, when we reflect on our Defence Forces, we think first and foremost of the distinguished overseas service that has been given over many years. We should never lose the opportunity of highlighting the importance of that. For young people who are considering a career in the Defence Forces, one of the attractive aspects is the type of service that they are in a position to give in parts of the world where our Defence Forces are deployed from time to time.
I am mindful of the fact that over the years people in the Minister's party have had various comments to make about the triple lock system. What is the Minister's current thinking on the triple lock, with particular reference to our participation in the EU battle groups? Let us speculate on a scenario whereby some fellow members of these battle groups express an interest in participating in a particular mission that might not have the approval of the United Nations. What strategic approach would the Minister for Defence adopt to that issue? Does the Minister envisage bringing proposals before the House on the triple lock? This issue has concerned some Fine Gael Members in the past.
I commend the Deputy on researching some of the views expressed by members of the Fine Gael party. At least they have views on issues of importance and we debate and consider them.
The debate on the Green Paper will give us a useful opportunity to discuss our position in dealing with peacekeeping and peace enforcement; to discuss the benefits of the triple lock and whether there are any detrimental problems or difficulties that arise around it; to discuss the relevance of all of these issues to the new security environment in which we find ourselves; and to discuss the relevance of what we perceive to be appropriate defence policy in a world where conventional armies do not pose any major threats at present to this country, but where terrorism does pose a threat to other EU member states and where we continue to have our domestic home-grown terrorists who pose a threat in the State. There is a range of interesting issues to be discussed and openly debated.
The triple lock has played an important role in ensuring that when we deploy our Defence Forces abroad we do so for peacekeeping and peace enforcement missions that have been given a UN mandate. We have played an important role in missions because our history and background is such that we have no colonial past. In the eyes of many countries in troubled regions of the world, although we were colonised, we do not have a past of colonising others. This gives our troops a particular perspective, whether they are located, as they were for some time, in Chad or in the Lebanon. Often the local communities in these areas have a different perspective towards Irish troops compared to others. We find that our troops can build up engagements and relationships on these missions that sometimes prove more problematic to others.
The UN mandate has an important role in all of this. The Green Paper will afford an opportunity for Members of all parties and none to consider and debate these issues. I do not believe we should take for granted that in the future we will do everything we have done in the past. We need to look at where the world is now, our place in the world, the role we play, what is relevant to Ireland in a defence context as a state and what role Ireland should play as a member state of the European Union. These are all interesting issues and I have no doubt we will have all sorts of interesting debates and exchanges on them during 2013.
I have two brief questions for the Minister. There is a request in at the moment for a trip to South Sudan, which is currently being evaluated. Will the Minister provide some more information about the number of personnel who may be involved? This allows me to come back in on a question I have raised in the past - that is, the use of Lariam. We tabled a question which was disallowed today because of the suspension of a Member. Will the Minister give his position on that request?
I noted the Minister's comments on the triple lock. I have raised this issue in the past as spokesperson on this portfolio. I am somewhat concerned about the Minister's answer. Up to six months ago the Minister said that the triple lock was a valuable aspect of how we did our business and that he could not foresee any changes to it. I note he did not say that today. He is now saying that as part of the Green Paper we should consider our role within global affairs and whether there are unintended consequences of having the triple lock in place. This does not instill me with great confidence that there are no plans to get rid of that mechanism. Will the Minister clarify the position? If it is the case that the Minister's position is the same as it was six months ago and he cannot foresee any circumstances in which we would not have a triple lock mechanism in place, then it should probably be clarified here today. Anyone listening to the debate would have picked up the impression that it is possibly up for review as part of the Green Paper.
As the Deputy is well aware, section 2 of the Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1960, as amended by the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, makes provision for the triple lock mechanism. That is the law and our position on this issue. It would be odd to produce a Green or White Paper that omitted all references to the triple lock mechanism. The Deputy would be more excited and upset if that were to happen. It is reasonable that we review all areas and positions taken and consider the benefits and downsides. I am not expressing a view about change. The last White Paper was produced in 2000 and no major debate preceded its introduction. We now have an opportunity, through a Green Paper, to debate and discuss issues. We need to review where the world is now as compared with where it was in 2000. It is good to review measures we believe are working satisfactorily to ensure they are. If there is something we can do to change or improve the way in which we approach or address issues, we should do so. We should consider whether stances taken in the past which made a lot of sense now make no sense. In a democracy, when one is considering the introduction of a policy paper that may be in place for a decade or more, as was the case in respect of the previous White Paper, it is important consideration is given to where we are. We are living in a different world. For example, there are some areas in which the triple lock mechanism is no longer relevant. An important issue is how we deal with international terrorism. If a group of terrorists based in Ireland is targeting, say, Britain, or persons here are committing criminal acts, should we do nothing until there is a UN mandate? There are concepts that do not cover every issue that arises in the area of defence. However, none of this should cause the Deputy sleepless nights.
It does not.
It is important that we review where we are, where we were in the past and what we believe will be the position in the future and the roles we can play of a constructive nature. Irish Defence Force' roles outside the domestic environment are essentially in the area of peacekeeping, peace enforcement and humanitarian assistance and will continue to be such.
The south Sudan region has been riven by war, horror, death, destruction and problems with landmines. We are reviewing the role Ireland might play in this regard. We have particular expertise which is recognised globally in the neutralisation of explosive devices. If we can make a contribution to making things safer, we will do so, but we will have to be careful about the nature of the mission involved. Decisions will be carefully made and in appropriate circumstances in the context of the legalities of any engagement that may take place.
If the decision is to participate in that mission, I presume the Lariam issue which I have raised a number of times in the past will arise again. Is the Department considering discontinuing the use of Lariam in favour of another drug? As far as I am aware, there are four compensation cases - there may be more - before the Department relating to the use of Lariam. I would welcome hearing the Minister's view on that issue.
That is a completely different issue. I am aware of the Deputy's concern about this matter. As he will be aware, Lariam is the recommended drug of choice in dealing with malaria. Recommendations on the use of this drug include that a person be medically examined prior to it being administered; that there be no adverse impacts on an individual - the reason it is administered some time prior to a mission - and that the contraindications and circumstances in which Lariam should not be used are outlined. A departmental review in this regard is almost complete. The Deputy may not be aware that a particular medication which it was previously recommended should be only used for a short period may now be used for a longer period and that in some circumstances it may be an alternative to Lariam, despite that up until relatively recently it was not proposed as such. This issue is also being examined. I am sure the Deputy would not expect me to say anything about any existing or threatened court case.
We have, in the context of the Defence Forces, ensured procedures that should be in place are in place. I do not know, in the context of a mission to Sudan, what will be the recommended medications. That issue has not yet come for consideration.
There is growing concern among persons who have served overseas and taken Lariam. I took it many years ago with no ill effects, at least, of which I am aware. Have the Defence Forces provided counselling, guidance or information directly to serving or retired members of the Defence Forces who have concerns about this issue? If the Department was to be proactive in this matter, by way of maximising the amount of information available, concerns would be allayed.
The maximum information is provided for individuals on the use of Lariam, the contraindications in terms of when it should not be used and the necessity, should a person have an adverse reaction, to immediately bring the matter to the attention of medical personnel within the Defence Forces.
Defence Forces Reserve Strength
Derek Keating
Question:10. Deputy Derek Keating asked the Minister for Defence the current numbers of the Reserve Defence Forces based in Dublin; his plans to expand the Reserve Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [54642/12]
The current number of Reserve Defence Force, RDF, personnel based in Dublin is 948. This number is divided into the various DFR units and sub-units currently in the Dublin area.
With regard to future plans for the Reserve Defence Force, as the Deputy will be aware, I recently published a value for money review of the Reserve Defence Forces. The steering committee concluded that the current reserve organisation was not fit for purpose and required radical reform. The central recommendation of the VFM steering committee is that the Reserve be retained, with 4,000 personnel spread countrywide and based in barracks and 16 other locations. This requires the consolidation of existing Reserve units throughout the country into a smaller number of full strength units. The retention of all locations was not a viable or sustainable option.
I have accepted the steering committee’s recommendations and directed that proposals for new organisational structures be prepared, taking account of the VFM report and the major reorganisation of the Permanent Defence Force, PDF. The Chief of Staff and Secretary General submitted an agreed report which set out detailed reorganisation proposals, including unit structures and the location of Reserve units. I have accepted these proposals.
A new single force concept will see PDF units having reserve components rather than a parallel Reserve, as is currently the case. Reserve units within barracks will be supported by their parent PDF unit and the 16 units outside PDF installations will be supported by dedicated full-time PDF personnel. This concept offers significant potential advantages in terms of training and development of the Reserve. The initiative of locating Reserve officers within the Defence Forces management structure will likewise underpin the future reserve. Work on implementing the recommendations of the VFM is under way.
In the light of my acceptance of the recommendations made in the VFM report, I have no plans for the expansion of the Defence Forces Reserve.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply and the information provided. Question No. 18 in my name deals with a similar issue. I am sure that in due course the Minister will provide me with the figures in relation to the involvement of the Reserve Defence Force at local level. I have raised this issue because I am acutely aware, as I know the Minister is, of the major role played by the Reserve Defence Force, in particular with Civil Defence, in the front-line services which it provides.
I believe they are the best in the world at what they do. I ask the Minister to consider conducting a review of the Reserve Defence Force to determine how we can utilise them, as a voluntary body of men and women, to provide leadership training, promote community awareness and team work, as well as the development of a social conscience for many young men and women who may not have considered joining up to now. This could be done effectively and in a very cost-effective manner. I became more aware of the potential of the Reserve Defence Force recently through meeting a constituent of mine who is a doctor of science in Trinity College, a non-commissioned officer in the reserve and a fitness instructor in her barracks. She outlined to me how she has gained invaluable experience as a member of the reserve and the voluntary work she has undertaken with them has really helped her to grow as a person. It is based on that experience that I ask the Minister to consider this option.
The Deputy has made a very interesting suggestion. I am conscious that the reserve trains but has not been deployed substantially to fulfil functions. I am concerned to ensure that the reserve force engages in work that is of benefit to the community and which its members feel is fulfilling, based on the training they have received. One of the difficulties at the moment, in practical terms, is that if an emergency arises, for example, the Civil Defence is called out. When members of the Civil Defence who are trained are called out, it does not result in any extra expenditure by the State. The reserve force is not called out, even though its members may be equally well trained because under the old system, being called out immediately incurred a cost to the State. If we can focus on providing the funding for training as opposed to for a gratuity and if the reserve, when called out, did so on a voluntary basis, there would be a greater opportunity for the reserve's engagement.
In the context of what the Deputy had to say about Dublin, he might be interested to know that under the reorganisation arrangements, units and personnel in the Reserve Defence Force are being moved across locations, similar to that which occurred in the course of the Permanent Defence Force reorganisation. I am advised by the military authorities that there are currently a total of 948 Reserve Defence Force personnel based in five locations in Dublin, namely Cathal Brugha Barracks, McKee Barracks, Baldonnel, Swords and St. Bricin's Hospital. Under the current reorganisation proposals, the Reserve Defence Force units in Baldonnel, Swords and St. Bricin's Hospital will be closed and these personnel will be reassigned. The strength of the reserve in the two retained locations in the Dublin area, namely Cathal Brugha Barracks and McKee Barracks, will be 518 personnel. Discussions are ongoing with Reserve Defence Force representative associations on the implementation of the reorganisation proposals, the implications for their members and how these can be addressed, including through possible transitional arrangements. I say that in the context of being aware that the numbers currently in Dublin exceed the numbers that will ultimately be in Dublin and I am anxious to ensure that those members of the reserve who are currently engaged can continue to be thus, if they so wish.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.